The great "Poker is rigged" debate - Collected threads edition - Page 1900 - Internet Poker

READ what you quoted!!

Your question is exactly my point!!

They don't know whether you have QQ or AA when they have K6o on K75, they'll just play TPWK.

The difference is when the PFR has AA, the % of K75 boards are decreased when the CC has K6o. Likewise, increased when the PFR has QQ.

The limp caller doesn't know what you have, that is exactly my point.

Quote

02-06-2012 , 01:46 PM

#47477

JPFisher55

veteran

Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 3,425

I suspect that TPTK27 is right about this example. Also, it is a hand that will seldom go all in so all in EV stats will not measure it.

Quote

02-06-2012 , 01:47 PM

#47478

Wiki

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 5,939

Quote:

Originally Posted by TPTK27

1- K6o limp calls vs QQ

Flop is K75. This scenario is boosted % wise by the RNG. Hence if you were to bet all the way here, you'd see loads of TPWK hands calling down.

2- K6o limps calls vs AA.

Flop is K75. This type of scenario is reduced % by the RNG. Hence in comparison to when bluffing, you will see a much smaller % of TPWK type hands calling to showdown, not because the fish adjusts, but because he plays the flops the RNG gives him.

You don't need figures and stats, it is obvious that if the % are being manipulated in this manner, then K6o is not losing as much as it would if the deal was random.

OK, so you are not giving figures.

Hard to see that a 'rig' is causing more of some event to take place that it should if you don't even know how often it happens and how often it should.

You see, this is the trouble with you rigtards; you have some lame brained idea but you will not even put the effort in to work out the parameters.

You don't know how often it happens or how often it should happen but you are happy to state for a fact that it happens too often.

Quote

02-06-2012 , 02:16 PM

#47479

Arouet

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 6,433

Quote:

Originally Posted by TPTK27

READ what you quoted!!

Your question is exactly my point!!

They don't know whether you have QQ or AA when they have K6o on K75, they'll just play TPWK.

The difference is when the PFR has AA, the % of K75 boards are decreased when the CC has K6o. Likewise, increased when the PFR has QQ.

The limp caller doesn't know what you have, that is exactly my point.

Is the bolded not measurable on a flop card distribution analysis?

You keep wanting to ignore this point, but it's not going away. Or are you going with an "it-will-all-even-out"in the end type of argument - and do you have any proposed way to do so?

Quote

02-06-2012 , 02:24 PM

#47480

Monteroy

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 16,729

Quote:

Originally Posted by TPTK27

You know full well the people who claim online poker to be rigged don't claim the sites 'target' them personally! That's just another Monteroy type argument trying to expose how silly 'rigtards' are.

Ask the riggies yourself if they think it is rigged specifically against them. Pretty much they all do, and in fact even the other riggies think you are a fake at this point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TPTK27

The rig is an overall program designed to lengthen the life of a weak player's bankroll.

So does this rig actually make the sites any money? If so how much? You keep avoiding this specific question.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TPTK27

I'd rather I get my concerns answered first, if you don't mind Arouet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TPTK27

The question remains, if my theory is considered bollocks, why not everyone combine together and post a load of HH's with my filters for betting high cards or missed draws to showdown, and prove my theory wrong.

Hence, no one is willing to post more HH's.

People have, and they have seen what a liar like you does when they try to help. That is why nobody will play with you any more according to your rules.

Whenever you want to take a simple challenge I have setup for you to test your rig you let me know, but until then realize that by now most people see you for what you are - a strange guy that just loves talking about conspiracies.

You don't want to prove anything, you just get the rush from building your conspiracies.

That's why you always ignore Arouet's questions and my direct questions and my offers of a simple challenge, because that is not fun for you, whereas building a whole new layer to your theory (whether it be with a new room, a youtube element, a seasonal element - who knows what is next) is what really excites you.

That is why you always ask people for hands that you can manipulate and play with as you like, that's the thrill for you - building the conspiracy. That's also why other riggies don't understand you - they just want to whine about not being able to win at poker, or they hate non-Americans, and your personal agenda is far different.

If you ever definitively prove Stars or Tilt is rigged I will send you $1,000. If you ever want to take a real challenge on the validity of your LOLtastic rig (whatever it is at this point) let me know - though I know you are not stupid enough to ever put your theory to the test because it will fail.

If you find others to play with you some more that's fine - at this point it is their choice whether to feed your conspiracy habit or not.

All the best.

Quote

02-06-2012 , 02:25 PM

#47481

J9Suited

adept

Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 1,156

Quote:

Originally Posted by TPTK27

You know full well the people who claim online poker to be rigged don't claim the sites 'target' them personally! That's just another Monteroy type argument trying to expose how silly 'rigtards' are.

For anyone who can think for themselves, your post is a load of nonsense, we've seen countless times the ability of power to corrupt, it's all about making money, often by any means possible. As FTP has shown us, the 'regulation' of online poker is a complete mockery- had BF never happened, FTP would still have it's 'license' despite not segregating player funds, it was only after BF that the regulators acted to save their own reps. It's laughable.

The rig is an overall program designed to lengthen the life of a weak player's bankroll.

It doesn't make A6o profitable to limp call, but it makes it lose nowhere near as much as it should in comparison to a random deal.

The RNG is simply manipulated to even out the playing field, and this is shown time and time again when you 3 barrel bluff with high cards or a missed draw- simple as that. Calling ranges don't change, it is the cards setting up different post flop scenarios that create the change in calling ranges, not the player magically adjusted to bluff catch!!

This is only correct in the imagination of small minded conspiracy theorists like yourself.

Are you going to release your HH dbase to someone to look at or are you worried it will just confirm you are full of ****?

Quote

02-06-2012 , 02:31 PM

#47482

Darkus63

adept

Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 947

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monteroy

This. TPTK27, you really are a complete waste of space.

Quote

02-06-2012 , 02:53 PM

#47483

Bingo_Boy

old hand

Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 1,872

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hoooligan

Anyone else than subs who run +EV or according to EV?

Quote:

Originally Posted by TPTK27

The RNG is simply manipulated to even out the playing field, and this is shown time and time again when you 3 barrel bluff with high cards or a missed draw- simple as that. Calling ranges don't change, it is the cards setting up different post flop scenarios that create the change in calling ranges, not the player magically adjusted to bluff catch!!

I can't believe you have unearthed, revealed and explained the rigging and nobody cares. That must be frustrating for you.

I wonder why all those winning players getting screwed by the rig don't seem to have any interest in what you are saying? How are you going to get the poker world to acknowledge the blatant evidence that you've presented?

I can only assume that your sharp mind and keen eye is simply too advanced for everybody else.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TPTK27

I'd rather I get my concerns answered first, if you don't mind Arouet.

I asked people to post hands were they bet to showdown as the PFR with high cards or a missed draw, 7 were posted. 5/7 (71%) showed what I argued.

I admitted 5/7 is a very small sample, hence asked subs to post more, or anyone else.

The question remains, if my theory is considered bollocks, why not everyone combine together and post a load of HH's with my filters for betting high cards or missed draws to showdown, and prove my theory wrong.

My general assumption is that for those who did look at HH's, subs especially, he looked at all those that qualified and realised he got called to showdown incredibly lightly over 50% of the time.

I could be wrong, but would like people to prove me wrong with HH's.

As only 7 have been posted, and seemingly no one is willing to post anymore (remember 5/7 showed VERY weak calling ranges), I can only assume the HH's would stick to the very obvious pattern the RNG is rigged.

Hence, no one is willing to post more HH's.

Have you posted your hand histories? Didn't a fellow rigtard post hands contrary to your theory in your separate thread which you haven't commented on? (You know, the serious thread that died despite containing clear, groundbreaking evidence of the rigging)

We can pretend you have got as many hands as you like. 50/70? 500/700? What would you like to do now? It is still meaningless unless you can quantify how many you would expect to see in a fair deal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TPTK27

Not going to waste much more time in this thread so here goes-

- The obvious shill answer is well what difference does it make to the game as you don't bluff weak players anyway, ie, you won't bet 3 streets with 89 on AKT vs a 90/7 fishinator.

No. "The obvious shill answer" is that your assumption that you would expect to see the same range for your two filters is absurd.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TPTK27

READ what you quoted!!

Read what you quoted. Wiki asked you a simple question which you ignored and continued to repeat the same flawed idea over and over and over again as if your theory is so advanced that people don't understand. Everybody (except Blatantlyrigged) understands. It is just wrong.

Quote

02-06-2012 , 03:05 PM

#47484

truthsbehind

journeyman

Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 238

If you think time is money and so it is then you can have the feeling that especially tournaments at Pokerstars are rigged.
Why should they do that? I said here possible reason often.

If good hands collide often then the amount of players sink faster.
Faster sinking of player amount means for Pokerstars new tournaments can start faster with new money. I dont care what people say here but thats a reason. Especially bigstacks seem to win with less good hands against shortstacks. The bigstacks call often allins even they know they have less good odds they still call because they know at Pokerstars bigstack in tournament will somehiw manage to win.
Now some will say bigstack will call because its bigstack and even he loses a hand he still has a bigstack. Thats right but if you play against better odds it will make your bigstack less sooner or later normally. But do things happen at Pokerstars normally?
A hand like A5 suited has some value its no big hand but it has value but what is it worth against hands like AK,KK,QQ? Not much its clearly not favourite but why Pokerstars software dont seem to care about this fact?

Because the tournament has to end soon. Time is money.

I want to say here that i am for freedom of opinion so i dont have a problem when someone says Pokerstars is not rigged but if you run under ev some hundreds big blinds maybe you will think different. If you dont run under ev its good its okay then.

I wish that poker sites are fair i like poker so i dont have an intention like ban online poker but it has to be clean and fair thats all players want.

Quote

02-06-2012 , 03:05 PM

#47485

otatop

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 12,721

I thought TPTK quit this thread again at some point over the past week.

Was he unable to "quit" for even a week this time?

Quote

02-06-2012 , 03:07 PM

#47486

otatop

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 12,721

Quote:

Originally Posted by truthsbehind

The bigstacks call often allins even they know they have less good odds they still call because they know at Pokerstars bigstack in tournament will somehiw manage to win.

You're obviously an incredibly skilled tournament player, and would of course be an amazingly successful poker site rigger, what with your completely sneaky method of rigging tournaments to speed up.

After all, it's not as if there's an easier way, like changing the lengths of levels or the blind increases.

Quote

02-06-2012 , 03:09 PM

#47487

Deuces McKracken

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 9,335

played on another network other than stars/ft. same scenario played out. win at first now...going on losing 40+ buy-ins in a row with 1 winning session at 10nl, 25nl, 5nl (a few winning sessions at 50 and 100nl. Maybe its the players I am playing (I play 5-10 and 10-20nl live and welcome the "regs") who bluff with the best hand (gets me every time) but I since I started counting I have lost with trips 6 times in a row. I have never won with two pair (maybe some bad folds?).

Today I was playing 5nl 6max (the bbj on this site is up to almost 600k) and I got all in pre with 99. The action was utg +2 raise, I reraise ai, and player to my left reraise all in. I tried to get my buddy to come over and bet me even money against one of the two players getting a set when they showed 44 and 22 (the one who called the all in re-raise had 22...yes I have lost 40+ buy ins playing good solid poker against these players). I didn't make the bet before the flop but I wasn't surprised to see a 4 on the flop, and chuckled a little when I saw the deuce hit the river to get the much larger side pot.

This is basically the same scenario experienced by thousands upon thousands of online players: win at first after transferring money, then doom. And how does a bbj get up to 600k anyway? I have seen hundreds of live bbj's. I have never seen one for 600k and the jackpots I have had occasion to see usually require quad 10's +.

All you faithful shills in here why not take me up on a freeroll for all us conspiracy hounds. Just answer the question: What would you do if the DOJ got the software and said it was rigged? Would you make an embarrassing youtube video planned by one the the skeptics? Would you tattoo "I was wrong" on your shoulder? Would you admit you get paid to come on here?

Quote

02-06-2012 , 03:17 PM

#47488

Darkus63

adept

Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 947

Quote:

Originally Posted by otatop

I thought TPTK quit this thread again at some point over the past week.

Was he unable to "quit" for even a week this time?

He's a serial thread leaver. AKA 'drama queen'.

Quote

02-06-2012 , 03:18 PM

#47489

otatop

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 12,721

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deuces McKracken

And how does a bbj get up to 600k anyway? I have seen hundreds of live bbj's. I have never seen one for 600k and the jackpots I have had occasion to see usually require quad 10's +.

It's almost as if live rooms can only deal ~400-600 hands an hour, as opposed to the thousands of hands an hour a site can deal.

Quote:

All you faithful shills in here why not take me up on a freeroll for all us conspiracy hounds. Just answer the question: What would you do if the DOJ got the software and said it was rigged? Would you make an embarrassing youtube video planned by one the the skeptics? Would you tattoo "I was wrong" on your shoulder? Would you admit you get paid to come on here?

It's adorable that you consider yourself a skeptic. Perhaps you should look up what that word actually means.

Quote

02-06-2012 , 03:21 PM

#47490

Arouet

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 6,433

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deuces McKracken

What would you do if the DOJ got the software and said it was rigged?

I'd ask what their reasons for believing it was rigged was.

Quote:

Would you tattoo "I was wrong" on your shoulder? Would you admit you get paid to come on here?

But most of the shills wouldn't be wrong. If the DOJ producing reliable evidence that the deal was rigged would change that to date no one has produced such reliable evidence.

You can be right for believing someone when evidence is produce, and also right for not believing something when no such evidence is presented. That's the essence of skepticism - withholding belief in claims until sufficient reliable evidence is produced. That at times means withholding belief in some things that are in fact true, because there is not enough reason to believe it yet.

Take string theory for example. Few would say that they believe it to be true, but if they find the evidence they are looking for, then we might one day say, yes, we believe it is true now.

Quote

02-06-2012 , 03:39 PM

#47491

Wiki

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 5,939

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arouet

You can be right for believing someone when evidence is produce, and also right for not believing something when no such evidence is presented.

Particularly given that in the second case there is so much raw data available and so many people with the interest and ability to analyse it.

If the sites somehow could keep the hand data private then one would be forced to give the riggies at least some more credence. I'm not sure how much, but at least some.

Quote

02-06-2012 , 06:34 PM

#47492

Bingo_Boy

old hand

Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 1,872

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deuces McKracken

Intead of saying "there is no evidence of rigging and what you are claiming makes no sense whatsover" the "shills" would say "we have evidence of rigging but what you were saying still makes no sense whatsoever".

There is no scenario where the rigtards in this thread are proven right.

Quote

02-06-2012 , 07:23 PM

#47493

joker15801

grinder

Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 561

Quote:

Originally Posted by NFuego20

Ummm, yeah seriously I don't even know how to respond to him as it was a wall of incoherent and illogical text.

My situation is pretty simple. The barriers to entry for the average player and time lag in moving money has hurt the health and volume of games. Government actions going back several years (which I have discussed at length throughout all of those years) have steadily threatened the ability for any site to properly function in this country. In no way, shape or form has rigging ever been a part of the equation, and anybody who claims it is despite years of opportunity to prove it have proven themselves to be certifiable morons.

So in my case, I fall back on the backup plan that I've always had. My CPA license has been reactivated, and call me crazy but working for one of the Big 4 accounting firms, while certainly challenging, is a decent and respectable living.

I'd be afraid to see the educational and career profiles of some of the riggies in this thread. There are a handful who have at least approached this topic with some level of intelligence, but they're the exception and not the rule.

As you swing from nut to nut of all the shills!

Quote

02-06-2012 , 07:26 PM

#47494

joker15801

grinder

Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 561

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darkus63

Quality post.

& even a better post!

Quote

02-06-2012 , 07:28 PM

#47495

joker15801

grinder

Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 561

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hoooligan

7 buy ins under EV this year. (33% cut off from my profit), let me guess, pretty much everyone is 10-30% below EV?

Makes perfect sense why I wouldn't play high limits on stars :P

Stealing cows

Anyone else than subs who run +EV or according to EV?

Ill reply for the shills.....You got outplayed or even a better 1....Its variance

Quote

02-06-2012 , 07:30 PM

#47496

joker15801

grinder

Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 561

Quote:

Originally Posted by J9Suited

Yeah I do. But us site employees get golden accounts, it's part of our contract.

Evidence?

Quote

02-06-2012 , 07:36 PM

#47497

joker15801

grinder

Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 561

Quote:

Originally Posted by J9Suited

Id just like to see your HH ...Just so we know you even play!

Quote

02-06-2012 , 07:40 PM

#47498

otatop

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 12,721

Quote:

Originally Posted by joker15801

Quote:

Originally Posted by joker15801

Quote:

Originally Posted by joker15801

Quote:

Originally Posted by joker15801

Quote:

Originally Posted by joker15801

Quote

02-06-2012 , 08:40 PM

#47499

raymears

self-banned

Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 976

Two consecutive royal flushes:

PokerStars Game #61363461472: Tournament #418010073, $3.00+$0.30 USD Hold'em No Limit - Level VII (125/250) - 2011/04/27 7:37:18 WET [2011/04/27 2:37:18 ET]
Table '418010073 65' 9-max Seat #1 is the button
Seat 1: LynxMendes (3021 in chips)
Seat 2: Tiewire (4760 in chips)
Seat 3: ShipthemBBs (26346 in chips)
Seat 4: hero (4356 in chips)
Seat 5: Mingr69 (1900 in chips)
Seat 6: L.A. Vale 60 (2712 in chips)
Seat 7: krepkiiperec (3075 in chips)
Seat 8: been_pt (13154 in chips)
Seat 9: emma2342 (1975 in chips)
LynxMendes: posts the ante 25
Tiewire: posts the ante 25
ShipthemBBs: posts the ante 25
hero: posts the ante 25
Mingr69: posts the ante 25
L.A. Vale 60: posts the ante 25
krepkiiperec: posts the ante 25
been_pt: posts the ante 25
emma2342: posts the ante 25
Tiewire: posts small blind 125
ShipthemBBs: posts big blind 250
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [5h 2h]
hero: folds
Mingr69: folds
L.A. Vale 60: folds
krepkiiperec: folds
been_pt: calls 250
emma2342: folds
LynxMendes: calls 250
Tiewire: folds
ShipthemBBs: checks
*** FLOP *** [8d Ad Kd]
ShipthemBBs: checks
been_pt: checks
LynxMendes: bets 750
ShipthemBBs: calls 750
been_pt: calls 750
*** TURN *** [8d Ad Kd] [Jd]
ShipthemBBs: checks
been_pt: checks
LynxMendes: bets 1996 and is all-in
ShipthemBBs: folds
been_pt: calls 1996
*** RIVER *** [8d Ad Kd Jd] [5c]
LynxMendes said, "wow"
*** SHOW DOWN ***
been_pt: shows [Td Qd] (a Royal Flush)
LynxMendes: shows [Tc Js] (a pair of Jacks)
LynxMendes said, "n1"
been_pt collected 7342 from pot
LynxMendes finished the tournament in 366th place
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 7342 | Rake 0
Board [8d Ad Kd Jd 5c]
Seat 1: LynxMendes (button) showed [Tc Js] and lost with a pair of Jacks
Seat 2: Tiewire (small blind) folded before Flop
Seat 3: ShipthemBBs (big blind) folded on the Turn
Seat 4: hero folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 5: Mingr69 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 6: L.A. Vale 60 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 7: krepkiiperec folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: been_pt showed [Td Qd] and won (7342) with a Royal Flush
Seat 9: emma2342 folded before Flop (didn't bet)

PokerStars Game #61363479609: Tournament #418010073, $3.00+$0.30 USD Hold'em No Limit - Level VII (125/250) - 2011/04/27 7:38:40 WET [2011/04/27 2:38:40 ET]
Table '418010073 65' 9-max Seat #2 is the button
Seat 2: Tiewire (4610 in chips)
Seat 3: ShipthemBBs (25321 in chips)
Seat 4: hero (4331 in chips)
Seat 5: Mingr69 (1875 in chips)
Seat 6: L.A. Vale 60 (2687 in chips)
Seat 7: krepkiiperec (3050 in chips)
Seat 8: been_pt (17475 in chips)
Seat 9: emma2342 (1950 in chips)
Tiewire: posts the ante 25
ShipthemBBs: posts the ante 25
hero: posts the ante 25
Mingr69: posts the ante 25
L.A. Vale 60: posts the ante 25
krepkiiperec: posts the ante 25
been_pt: posts the ante 25
emma2342: posts the ante 25
ShipthemBBs: posts small blind 125
hero: posts big blind 250
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to hero [Qc 8d]
Mingr69: folds
been_pt said, "ty"
L.A. Vale 60: folds
krepkiiperec: folds
been_pt: folds
emma2342: raises 1675 to 1925 and is all-in
Tiewire: folds
ShipthemBBs: calls 1800
hero: folds
*** FLOP *** [Js As Ks]
*** TURN *** [Js As Ks] [6d]
*** RIVER *** [Js As Ks 6d] [Qs]
*** SHOW DOWN ***
ShipthemBBs: shows [6h Qd] (two pair, Queens and Sixes)
emma2342: shows [Kc Ts] (a Royal Flush)
emma2342 collected 4300 from pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 4300 | Rake 0
Board [Js As Ks 6d Qs]
Seat 2: Tiewire (button) folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 3: ShipthemBBs (small blind) showed [6h Qd] and lost with two pair, Queens and Sixes
Seat 4: hero (big blind) folded before Flop
Seat 5: Mingr69 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 6: L.A. Vale 60 folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 7: krepkiiperec folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 8: been_pt folded before Flop (didn't bet)
Seat 9: emma2342 showed [Kc Ts] and won (4300) with a Royal Flush

Quote

02-06-2012 , 08:43 PM

#47500

otatop

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 12,721

Wow, something that happens ~1 time in 35,000 happened back to back at least once out of 418,010,073 tournaments.

I look forward to you posting this exact same hand history for the 40th time sometime soon.

Quote

Page 1900 of 3721

First

900 1400 1700 1800 1850 1880 1890 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1910 1920 1950 2000 2100 2400 2900

Last

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 1900 of 3721

First

900 1400 1700 1800 1850 1880 1890 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1910 1920 1950 2000 2100 2400 2900

Last